A level-headed examination of the issue by Kate McEvoy
Nationality is a hot button topic in Irish, and indeed international rugby these days. Michael Bent, the former Hurricanes tighthead, has been whisked from the airport to an Ireland training squad before he has donned the blue of Leinster, leading to much debate on the topic. He's got an Irish granny, a sister who's competed in the Rose of Tralee and has already been photographed with a hurl in hand (pic). The questions in all quarters has been does he “deserve” to don the green of Ireland?
This is an issue that rears its head time & again. I started to have a serious think about the topic when an article on the topic from The Crooked Feed, Planet Rugby's newsletter, rubbed me up thoroughly the wrong way. On subsequent perusals, it's not quite as inflammatory as it first appeared but words such as “mercenary” vs “purist” and casting doubt over a “foreigner” coach's ability to “defend the integrity of that country's national identity” did not sit well with me.
When I started to read a little more around the subject headline such as “Born here to play there: RWC 2011 squads chocker with 'Kiwis'” and “This is an unlovely England side of mixed nationality that does not deserve your support” abound. It's easy to get hot under the collar it seems, with a rather nasty xenophobic, or at best, rampantly traditionalist, streak running through many articles on the subject. Inspired by the arrival of the front row from The Land of the Long White Cloud, I've decided to take a look at the debate surrounding nationality from both an Irish and an international perspective. And I've tried to keep it nice.
First things first, nationality in sport matters. Nationality in rugby matters. There's no point pretending otherwise. One look at John Hayes bawling his eyes out during the rendition of Amhrán na bhFiann at Croker tells you that. It gives players something additional to spur them on, creates an extra sense of identity and connection for fans. Rugby is a sport deeply steeped in history and tradition, and this is something to be valued.
But the world is getting smaller. People don't always grow up where they're born. (Does Jamie Heaslip consider himself Israeli rather than Irish? Probably not.) We don't work our whole lives in the same town and live next door to our parents. We cross continents for our livelihood, for the adventure of it. We raise families of mixed nationality a thousand miles from our birthplace. Nationality has become a fluid concept. Notions of the 1930s style exclusive nationality are out-dated and an unrealistic reflection of today's world, rugby playing and otherwise.
I'm not for one moment advocating some sort of Rent-a-Ruchie system when world class players can jump from team to team for whomever pays top dollar. We've got Japanese club rugby for that! However another important aspect of this issue is to acknowledge that rugby is a minority sport, however loathe we might be to admit it. Residency laws are important for the development of the game.
Firstly, players like Tim Visser who's skills have outgrown the rugby scene in his native Holland can blossom on the global stage with the Flying Dutchman donning the navy blue of Scotland. In other words, players can develop beyond the ceiling their birthplace might put on their rugby career. I fail to see this as a negative, for an individual or for the sport. Although ask me again if Edinburgh's favourite son crosses the whitewash against us come Six Nations Time and you might get a slightly different (and unprintable) reply.
Secondly, free movement of players who have not successfully broken into their native rugby side to developing rugby countries is essential for the growth of the game on the global scale. Ideally, this is done tantamount to the development of a grass roots structure which allows indigenous playing talent to come through alongside the more established players. Furthermore, I support the right of professional rugby players to earn a living and this sometimes means playing for a country not of your birth.
Moving onto another facet of the debate, the 3 year residency rule vs the unearthing of an Irish granny. George Hook recently said on Newstalk that if it came to a choice between selecting a player qualified through residency or through Irish ancestry he would go for the latter. I'm afraid that's where George and I part company. Although I don't think ancestry is an invalid option, surely someone who commits a minimum of 3 years to living and playing here has invested a lot into Irish Rugby? This week Neil Francis reminisced over the case of his former team-mate, the Australian outhalf Brian Smith who played 9 times for Ireland on account of his imaginary Irish grandmother. Compare that to the contribution Richardt Strauss has made to Irish rugby over the past three years.
But it is the ancestry rule that had us casting our eyes to Michael Bent in the first place. However the crux of this issue relates to one of the stickiest aspects of the import of players. Irish rugby is in dire straits regarding the lack of depth at tighthead. We all saw what happened when Mike Ross was forced to leave the field at Twickenham. Now let us never speak of it again. Bent has been parachuted directly in to fulfill a specific role. This offends people's sensibilities and leads to cries of “mercenary”!
For me it is not so much at the expense of any particular Irish player, but more symptomatic of the lack of development at the front row provincially and at underage level. People are quick to cite the over-reliance of the provinces on props from overseas, and this is an issue, but it's important to remember that Mike Ross didn't get near the Irish set-up until he came home. A native of Cork, Ross played for 4 years at Harlequins without being blooded into the international side.
Michael Bent is currently a quick-fix solution to a deep-seated problem. He is qualified and, to my mind, deserves a shot. The fact that he hasn't earned his way into a green jersey could be considered unsettling. As Keith Wood says “It can't be that easy to play for your country, to play for Ireland as to get on a flight & fly into the country. It can't be.” This is a valid viewpoint. I view the situation as symptomatic of a failure on the part of development in this country. The real question is how have we reached this point. It's easy to wrap it up in a green jersey and hot-blooded patriotism but this is a ten year problem that's come to a head this week. This is the real problem at the heart of the Michael Bent debate, not whether he as an individual is entitled to play for Ireland. Much like all of our injury related problems, this is not an ideal situation. But it is the situation we have to deal with, and as it stands, it's Bent for the bench. Let's see what he has to offer.
Finally, The Crooked Feed site South Africa as the ideal example, who insist all of their players, giving the notable example of Zimbabwean Tendai “Beast” Mtawarira become South African citizens. At the end of the day, I would welcome any player who pulls on a green shirt, whether through residency or ancestry and leaves it all out on the pitch for Ireland. I'm not sure how relevant what it says on the front of his passport is. I fail to see how that will improve his game. However, when it comes at the expense of, or as a symptom of, national development, it is part of a larger rugby issue. As Alan Quinlan says in The Irish Times, put patriotism to one side for a minute. There's no long-term benefit in hiding behind the thorny topic of nationality when the real issue here is a lack of youth development. Michael Bent looks like the right player who is in this position for the wrong reasons. Time will tell how he, and this debate, plays out.
Kate McEvoy : Munster fan in a sea of Leinster blue. Raised on a strict diet of Bective Rangers. Earliest childhood memory is stud marks in the muck. Former hooker for a father & a mother with an eye for a forward pass bordering on freakish . Often to be found down Monkstown RFC/ A & E on account of the exploits of the better half. Best rugby memory, Toulouse main square, May 24th 2008. Epitaph will read “Knew a lot about rugby for a girl.” Can be found tweeting optimistically at @ImKateMc
